194 réponses à ce sujet

[BaladasDemnevanni]

It's a fact that the council believed that the Reapers were coming at the end of ME1.  If they say otherwise in ME2, they were lying, or their opinion was retconned.  If they were lying, then they understand the threat of the Reapers but don't want it to be public, so they would throw resources Shepard's way to, I don't know, save all life in the galaxy from destruction.  What you're claiming is happening is akin to the United States not allowing information about the attack on Pearl Harbor to get out, and instead of joining wwII, to purposefully hinder the efforts of their military to combat this threat.  Sound like a realistic attitude for the people in power?  No, it's not.  

...Really? You're going to use Pearl Harbor to illustrate your point? You really are hilarious. You keep saying 'retcon'. I don't think you understand what that word means.

[wolf99000]

while I dont think all the religious stuff would be good I do think there should be a cost to him being brought back to life also we have the fact that the bartender poisoned him and everyone up to that point had died but you did not so maybe you have been updated in some ways



maybe that will come out in me3 and be the reason for killing the tim

[TheTrooper1138]

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

I'm not a Christian, and I'm mostly moderate politically.  I believe abortion is murder.  Have I disproved your point now?

And I believe, you are an idiot, for calling it "murder" alone. "Murder" includes the killing of a coscient being with the will to live. This is not the case with abortion, you fail.

CmdrFenix83 wrote...


Rape victim - That's what adoption is for.  If you don't want it, put it up for someone that can't have children of their own.  The only reasonable case you can make is for rape.  Otherwise, risk of pregnancy is just a consequence to you, or anyone, being a ****.  If you're stupid enough to open your legs voluntarily, you should damned
well live with the consequences.  Don't want the kid after that, then there are people out there that do. 

So after being raped the woman should be force to carry the fetus around for 9 months, then going through the trouble to birth it? Are you ****ing serious?
And I would say abortion is better than bringing a child into a family that doesn't want it, where the child will probably grow up unhappily and may get emotional problems from that, suffer a hard life etc.. I think THAT is inhumane, aborting the fetus will hurt nobody really, but raising an unwanted child in a probably "broken" family will traumatize this child. I'm also against adoption for similar reasons, I believe children should grow up in their real and intact family. There might be circumstances in which adoption is the best choice, but in most cases I'd be against it.

CmdrFenix83 wrote... 

And again, I believe religion is a load of BS in general.  Your belief that religion is required to believe murder is wrong is completely baseless.

No, it's not. The basic values of our society are based on religion and to truly get rid of the influence Christianity has on us, we have to get rid of those as well and define some rational values based on human experience, not on some old book. And I see no rational reason for abortion to be considered "murder". From a humane point of view we have to think about whether or not it would be right to bring a child into a broken family, rather than just abort the fetus which can't feel anything yet.

But I suggest we start going back to topic, since I still haven't gotten many satisfying replies to the original topic of this thread...

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

A fictional explanation why made up religions aren't addressed from a purely scientific proceedure?  Really?  By stating an explanation at all, there would be so many religions angry that BioWare decided to state that one specific one was indeed the true religion.  Your body died, it was resusitated, just like if your heart stopped and you were clinically dead before a defibrulator shocked your heart back to life.  Why on earth does this need philosophical explanation?

except that Shepard's heart hadn't stopped for a few minutes, he/she was dead for almost two years and probably not just dead, from what we learn probably not even "intact" anymore... that's a bit more than one's heart stopping for a few minutes...

[Terraneaux]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

...Really? You're going to use Pearl Harbor to illustrate your point? You really are hilarious. You keep saying 'retcon'. I don't think you understand what that word means.

I like how you aren't able to actually provide any reasons why I'm wrong.  You keep saying I don't understand what 'retcon' means, but you don't say how I'm using the word wrong or offer a contravening definition.  

CmdrFenix83 wrote...

They never said that.  Only Anderson/Udina make a speach about this.  The Council themselves just thank you and humanity for saving them and the Citadel from Saren and the Geth.  Anderson believes you.  The rest of the Council does not.  This is why they sent you on Geth cleanup missions, to shut your insane, apocalypse-prophetic mouth.

At about 3:30 the asari councilor acknowledges that you saved billions of lives from the Reapers.

[BaladasDemnevanni]

Terraneaux wrote...

I like how you aren't able to actually provide any reasons why I'm wrong.  You keep saying I don't understand what 'retcon' means, but you don't say how I'm using the word wrong or offer a contravening definition.  

Oh, am I unable? I would have thought that multiple people laughing at your examples would be enough. But if I must indulge you, here I go then.

A retcon is whenever a director, writer, game developer, whatever alters a plot or element of a story in a way without explanation to say 'this is how things always were'. A retcon would be if Shepard was a human in the first game, now he is a turian in ME2, and an Asari in ME3 with no explanation as to why.

They are not the same thing as an expansion of the plot. In ME1, you were shown that Cerberus is a one dimensional villain through a series of side quests. Retconning would be if those events had never occurred. They have-as multiple characters point out.
 
Garrus - "Cerberus, Shepard? Really? Do you remember those sick experiments they were conducting?"

Your definition of 'retcon' is far too broad. I could say Darth Vader was retconned to be Luke's father in Episode V, which he wasn't in Episode IV. That's not the case, he always was Luke's father; you just didn't know it. Cerberus never was this one-dimensional evil villain (politics rarely work that way), but you didn't know that either. You may not like the explanations, but stop lying to yourself and calling it a retcon.

[allankles]

smudboy wrote...

Being a BioWare game, I was totally guessing Shep'd have some visions or dream-communication with the enemy/Harbinger/whoever, due to his upgrades.
Maybe the dev's will say he was infused with Geth/Reaper tech and it'll happen in ME3. And you can finally hunt down TIM and thank him personally. With the Widow.
Shepard: "Dammit my shoulder hurts!"

We kind of already know Shep's character. Dr. Chakwas tells you herself, she says that most people would be psychologically affected by what Shep has experienced, but not Shep. I'm sure Shep went through a few panicky seconds when s/he was told s/he was resurrected with state of the art technology, but it wouldn't last long enough for it to actually be a footnote.

And if you're an all action military commander, how much time do you have to sit down with councilors or have philosophic debates about whether you're really "you"? Shep's situation essentially prevents him from having introspective monologues about resurrection.

Modifié par allankles, 20 mars 2010 - 04:31 .

[bjdbwea]

The story should never have been like this. It should've started exactly where ME 1 ended. No silly killing of the main character, no tons of new characters, no shallow and at times outright ridiculous new plot elements. Just a proper continuation of part 1. That would have even saved the developers time, and it would have made ME 2 a much better game.

[TheTrooper1138]

allankles wrote...

We kind of already know Shep's character. Dr. Chakwas tells you herself, she says that most people would be psychologically affected by what Shep has experienced, but not Shep. I'm sure Shep went through a few panicky seconds when s/he was told s/he was resurrected with state of the art technology, but it wouldn't last long enough for it to actually be a footnote.

And if you're an all action military commander, how much time do you have to sit down with councilors or have philosophic debates about whether you're really "you"? Shep's situation essentially prevents him from having introspective monologues about resurrection.

so where's the RPG in that? 

bjdbwea wrote...

The story should never have been like this. It should've started exactly where ME 1 ended. No silly killing of the main character, no tons of new characters, no shallow and at times outright ridiculous new plot elements. Just a proper continuation of part 1. That would have even saved the developers time, and it would have made ME 2 a much better game.

I agree, I don't like the whole dying thing anyways and the fact that they only use it as a plot device without explanation makes it just worse...

[wolf99000]

I read somewhere on here that there was more to the game that might have gone into the death in more detail the whole liara meeting had a ton cut out for the comics and legion was meant to have helped her with getting your body thats how he got the armour



maybe if they had kept all this in it would make sense to you



but for me it does work because it alienates you from all your friends the council dont trust you the alliance dont even ash and kaidan dont because you are with cerburus its just a plot device to put you in worst position you could be going into the final chapter

[allankles]

TheTrooper1138 wrote...

allankles wrote...

We kind of already know Shep's character. Dr. Chakwas tells you herself, she says that most people would be psychologically affected by what Shep has experienced, but not Shep. I'm sure Shep went through a few panicky seconds when s/he was told s/he was resurrected with state of the art technology, but it wouldn't last long enough for it to actually be a footnote.

And if you're an all action military commander, how much time do you have to sit down with councilors or have philosophic debates about whether you're really "you"? Shep's situation essentially prevents him from having introspective monologues about resurrection.

so where's the RPG in that? 

The RPG lies in the overall choices Shep makes with the people he interacts with, you add color to Shep's personality with those choices. I don't think it's cool to see Shep having monologues about hiis/her issues. I guess a discussion with Kelly about it would have been cool, but monologues, not cool.

[JMA22TB]

bjdbwea wrote...

The story should never have been like this. It should've started exactly where ME 1 ended. No silly killing of the main character, no tons of new characters, no shallow and at times outright ridiculous new plot elements. Just a proper continuation of part 1. That would have even saved the developers time, and it would have made ME 2 a much better game.

We've got a brilliant critic on our hands! I'll handle this simply:

If the plot sucked so bad, let's see your new and improved version. How would you rewrite ME2's story?

[Little Paw]

TheTrooper1138 wrote...

Little Paw wrote...

TheTrooper1138 wrote...

Little Paw wrote...

To the OP:
Atheism solves a lot of issues for me that the original poster brings up.
She was saved by science, and medical fact.
Religion and/or philosophical pretense is a made up reality that has no bearing on this fact.
Fact, she was dead.
Fact, she is now alive.
That is all I need.
Man should make his own reality, rather than believe in a made up one.

So by making up one's own reality, you really mean, just accept an atheist view point and don't ask questions about life (or rather the meaning of it)? I believe in none of the established religions, but there's enough in this world to make me believe there's more to this than the materialistic side. 
And if you just accept Atheism as your new "religion", then that's just the same as believing in "God" without questioning that belief.

No by making up reality I mean religion is made up.
How do you surmise all of you say from me saying I am atheist? Atheist as a new religion? I never said that. That is quite contrdictory to what atheism is. Theists like to say atheism is just another belief but it is actually non-belief.
Beliving in science and fact is practical, not a belief "system".
Questions about life? Ever read any good existential books? You can question life without religion.
Atheists question life all the time.
Asimov, Ayn Rand, Douglas Adams, Dave Barry, to name a few, and the list goes on.
I simply stated that science and fact make me feel okay about Shep's death and subsequent being brough back to life. Atheism is the non-belief system that makes it so I do not need to contemplate any ethical, moral, or philisophical meaning to it.
Sinple...your post is pure conjecture and assumption.
Nothing I stated above leaves room for interpretation. Feel free to "ask" me questions, but please do not assume what I am thinking.
Danke.

"Religion and/or philosophical pretense is a made up reality that has no bearing on this fact."

By this you were making atheism a doctrine. "Fact" is relative, as enough philosophers already wrote (most famous one of course Plato). So if we do have a "soul" than the fact that Shepard was dead does indeed have a bearing on his/her being resurrected. IF Shep has a soul and it did and it was "released", when he/she died, then who is the resurrected Shepard really? Of course this is pretty esoteric, but still, as someone who spends a great deal of time thinking about these things (though my current reading, Nietzsche, would rather support the Nihilistic view point that there is no soul and therefore no conflict, I suppose) and therefore it bothers me.
And I don't have a problem if they come to a different conclusion from mine, but at least spend some thoughts on that and not just completely ignore the fact that Shepard was dead for about 2 years. It's just as if nothing happened and that's too little for such a big impact.
Also I didn't want to attack you there, sorry if you got the impression, but I have kinda made the experience that atheists tend to be pretty intolerant about other people's beliefs and that makes it rank for me up there with Christianity and others...  
In the end we all don't know what happens to us, when we die. And if the atheists are right, we will never know...  

Also, @Schroing: I won't reply to you anymore, unless you come up with some arguments. And maybe pro-life isn't all Christian, but Christians are definitely the majority of it and the part that gets really extreme about it...

There is more to reading than Plato and Nietzshe...been there done that over 25 years ago.
And AGAIN, you use conjecture and personal experience to state atheists are intolerant of other peope's beliefs - but what does that have to do with OUR discussion? Again, you did not ASK me if I was tolerant or not. So I will indulge you:
I am extremely tolerant of others beliefs....I actually appreciate discussing them with people as we all are entitled to believe as we see fit where I live, and that in and of itself is a pretty neat thing many people on the planet cannot say.
But, for the LAST TIME...both of my posts only dealt with MY OPINION. I was not refuting anything.
All I stated was MY OPINION on the matter, but you took it in other directions...
Simply, there is NO mention of soul, religion, or philosophy in the game regarding Shep's being brought back to life. There is the issue in dealing with Cerberus and how THAT ethically effects your player character, and nothing esle. I can venture that humans in the game may have moved past some kind of theistic belief, but that would be conjecture. But, as an atheist, the world ME presents me actually fits me well...science and fact. That is all they are are offering. And if anything, there is a chance that the story might give humans information on where they really come from.
The way I see it, you are pondering his/her predicament based on OUR REAL LIFE WORDLY belief systems...not the world in which the game takes place. The game presents no belief system, so to assume there is one in the game is simply, an assumption...it's agame, so not worth a thought unless presented to me as an idea within the plot.
I can't argue playing the character as having ANY religious beliefs if it is not part of the story. It is NOT.
If I was given a CHOICE in the game of having a morale compass regarding his/her situation only THEN would it be worth discussing. Maybe that will happen. For instance, in DA and The Witcher you can be negative towards the religions presented to you in those games. In that case, the morale compass is presented. In ME the only morale compass is the fairly simple goody 2 shoes, or bad ass choices.
I merely said, that being an atheist, the story does not illicit any "wonder" for me of how it ethically effects my player character to be brought back to life other than the fact that science and funding made it so...yet you enjoy/want/need to turn it into a bigger discussion than it needs to be.
And no I did not feel attacked...now worries there.

Modifié par Little Paw, 20 mars 2010 - 10:24 .

[BaladasDemnevanni]

Edit: Gone.

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 20 mars 2010 - 10:56 .

[Little Paw]

Appreciated...

Modifié par Little Paw, 20 mars 2010 - 11:10 .

[Knoll Argonar]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

Little Paw wrote...

Trooper, making believe you are smart and have a point does not mean you are smart and have a point.
There is more to reading than Plato and Nietzshe...you reason like a 12 year old.
Trolling on the other hand...you are an expert.

There's only one possible interpretation of Plato and Nietzshe, didn't you know? It's inconceivable that two people can read the same thing and come to different conclusions.

Poetry anyone? xD

[Little Paw]

Oh and Trooper....where did we all agree that we have a soul?

That throws me off.

[lastpawn]

We're told that Shepard is not a clone, but the actual re-animated, "enhanced" body of Shepard. Even from our very limited modern knowledge of the body we know that a person can technically die for some period of time and "come back," whether through medical intervention or an "act of god" if you will. I don't have an issue with this, especially since I'm perfectly content to suspend disbelief over many other more implausible scenarios in ME. Seems like most commentators here just have an axe to grind with something else...

Modifié par lastpawn, 20 mars 2010 - 10:39 .

[Little Paw]

TheTrooper1138 wrote...

allankles wrote...

We kind of already know Shep's character. Dr. Chakwas tells you herself, she says that most people would be psychologically affected by what Shep has experienced, but not Shep. I'm sure Shep went through a few panicky seconds when s/he was told s/he was resurrected with state of the art technology, but it wouldn't last long enough for it to actually be a footnote.

And if you're an all action military commander, how much time do you have to sit down with councilors or have philosophic debates about whether you're really "you"? Shep's situation essentially prevents him from having introspective monologues about resurrection.

so where's the RPG in that? 

bjdbwea wrote...

The story should never have been like this. It should've started exactly where ME 1 ended. No silly killing of the main character, no tons of new characters, no shallow and at times outright ridiculous new plot elements. Just a proper continuation of part 1. That would have even saved the developers time, and it would have made ME 2 a much better game.

I agree, I don't like the whole dying thing anyways and the fact that they only use it as a plot device without explanation makes it just worse...

Maybe, just maybe, the lack of explanation is that THEY, in the GAME, don't need one.
Your desire to have one is driven by your WORDLY belief system in YOUR world.
In the GAME, they are past needing that explanation.
That is pretty much what I am trying to say.
I only bring up the atheism, because you can pretty much relate the lack of a belief system in the GAME to fitting with an atheist viewpoint.

[TheTrooper1138]

Little Paw wrote...

There is more to reading than Plato and Nietzshe...been there done that over 25 years ago.
And AGAIN, you use conjecture and personal experience to state atheists are intolerant of other peope's beliefs - but what does that have to do with OUR discussion? Again, you did not ASK me if I was tolerant or not. So I will indulge you:
I am extremely tolerant of others beliefs....I actually appreciate discussing them with people as we all are entitled to believe as we see fit where I live, and that in and of itself is a pretty neat thing many people on the planet cannot say.
But, for the LAST TIME...both of my posts only dealt with MY OPINION. I was not refuting anything.
All I stated was MY OPINION on the matter, but you took it in other directions...
Simply, there is NO mention of soul, religion, or philosophy in the game regarding Shep's being brought back to life. There is the issue in dealing with Cerberus and how THAT ethically effects your player character, and nothing esle. I can venture that humans in the game may have moved past some kind of theistic belief, but that would be conjecture. But, as an atheist, the world ME presents me actually fits me well...science and fact. That is all they are are offering. And if anything, there is a chance that the story might give humans information on where they really come from.
The way I see it, you are pondering his/her predicament based on OUR REAL LIFE WORDLY belief systems...not the world in which the game takes place. The game presents no belief system, so to assume there is one in the game is simply, an assumption...it's agame, so not worth a thought unless presented to me as an idea within the plot.
I can't argue playing the character as having ANY religious beliefs if it is not part of the story. It is NOT.
If I was given a CHOICE in the game of having a morale compass regarding his/her situation only THEN would it be worth discussing. Maybe that will happen. For instance, in DA and The Witcher you can be negative towards the religions presented to you in those games. In that case, the morale compass is presented. In ME the only morale compass is the fairly simple goody 2 shoes, or bad ass choices.
I merely said, that being an atheist, the story does not illicit any "wonder" for me of how it ethically effects my player character to be brought back to life other than the fact that science and funding made it so...yet you enjoy/want/need to turn it into a bigger discussion than it needs to be.
And no I did not feel attacked...now worries there.

well, I guess I misinterpreted your original posting, bad experience with intolerant atheists... <_<
Personally I find atheism a bit discouraging, but then again, each to his own...
BUT to the game: in ME1 Ash tells about her believing in "God" and if I'm not mistaken you get the option to reply "so do I". So if is obviously possible to play a "religious" Shepard at that point, but in ME2 you don't get the option when something happens (you die ) that would surely make any religious person think. So they are being rather inconsistent there...

Little Paw wrote...

Oh and Trooper....where did we all agree that we have a soul?
That throws me off.

where did I say we did?  

Little Paw wrote...

Maybe, just maybe, the lack of explanation is that THEY, in the GAME, don't need one.
Your desire to have one is driven by your WORDLY belief system in YOUR world.
In the GAME, they are past needing that explanation.
That is pretty much what I am trying to say.
I only bring up the atheism, because you can pretty much relate the lack of a belief system in the GAME to fitting with an atheist viewpoint.

Well, but as I said, we do have Ash who is a Christian and whom you can tell you believe in that stuff as well...
And as I said before, I find it a bit cheap that with all the alien races we have in ME, the only religious or spiritual ones are fanatics. I'm not a religious person - though a bit spiritual maybe -, but I find that slightly insulting even... I mean, just look at Star Wars, there we actually do get some mythologic/religious cultural aspects and they make a good story great imao.

[Little Paw]

Very good points Trooper!!!

I do remember that Ash conversation, and to me Bioware should have developed that instead of making her a throw away conversation in ME2.

Now you have me thinking!

I just checked out an old saved game and yes, it's a bit of a tease to hear her say that and then neither game really dives into it. I am sure at the time I blew it off, being the atheist and all. LOL

Maybe she will show up in ME3 and it can be revisited and developed.

As for atheism, don't sweat it...having strong values does not require any specific prescribed system. Anyone can have values.

I am a really good guy; just ask my wife and kids!

Peace...

[Sharn01]

JMA22TB wrote...

bjdbwea wrote...

The story should never have been like this. It should've started exactly where ME 1 ended. No silly killing of the main character, no tons of new characters, no shallow and at times outright ridiculous new plot elements. Just a proper continuation of part 1. That would have even saved the developers time, and it would have made ME 2 a much better game.

We've got a brilliant critic on our hands! I'll handle this simply:

If the plot sucked so bad, let's see your new and improved version. How would you rewrite ME2's story?

Well, you where not quoting me, but here is one example of a better way in my opinion at least.

AsariC: Shepard, what has your investigation of the missing colonies turned up?

Shepard: The investigation is not going well, I discovered a quarian survivor who had footage of the collector's abducting the colonist's using some type of swarm to paralyze them while they carry them off in pod's.

SalarianC: This is most disturbing new's, we know very little of the collector's, we would like you to forward this evidence to us, perhaps more can be gleaned from what you found.

Shepard: It get's worse, Cerberus is also investigating the missing colonies, I ran into two of their agent's, for the sake of the mission I worked with them and it went well.

Anderson: I don't trust Cerberus, I doubt they would take such an interest solely for the sake of the colonist's.

AsariC: Cerberus are terrorist's Commander, you should have apprehended them.

TurianC: I agree, what  where you thinking Shepard?

Shepard: I really was not in the position to do so, the quarian survivor was left mentally scarred by the ordeal and had all the security mech's attacking us, if I had not worked with them we would not have survived.  They also extended an invitation to work with us to discover what the collector's want with the colonist's.

SalarianC: It is strange for Cerberus to extend a hand of cooperation, they must have some altier motive.

AsariC: Still, this may be an opprotunity to discover what their plan's are, and they may be able to help you complete your mission, we can not extend many resources outside of Citidel space.

TurianC: Agreed, you should work with them temporarily Shepard, we give you our permission to do so, but you must not make it public knowledge.

Anderson:  Keep working on your mission, we need to discover what the collector's are up to, but do not trust Cerberus, if you discover what they are really after do what you must and contact us when you are able.

Shepard: Understood, I will contact you again when I have more information.



I think its a much more realistic way to get Bioware's favorite little pet into the game.  Granted it does not go over all the possible dialog option's for Shep, its just an example.  It also leaves the option of treachery and joining Cerberus for douche Shepard's.

[TheTrooper1138]

Little Paw wrote...

Very good points Trooper!!!
I do remember that Ash conversation, and to me Bioware should have developed that instead of making her a throw away conversation in ME2.
Now you have me thinking!
I just checked out an old saved game and yes, it's a bit of a tease to hear her say that and then neither game really dives into it. I am sure at the time I blew it off, being the atheist and all. LOL
Maybe she will show up in ME3 and it can be revisited and developed.
As for atheism, don't sweat it...having strong values does not require any specific prescribed system. Anyone can have values.
I am a really good guy; just ask my wife and kids!
Peace...

Why would you not be? 
I'm not religious either, I'm just not atheist but agnostic, though I find myself strongly interested in European Pagan Religions, and I'd say I have stronger values than most Christians. Values like honesty for example which seem to count for nothing in Christianity.
Well, usually my characters ask Ash something like "but you're not a fanatic, right?", so I never really delved into that dialogue as well, but again, you do get the option to give a "positive" reply and that would make Shepard a religious person and then Shepard would probably have some issues about the whole resurrection thing.

Also, with my current Renegade character I find myself a bit amused (and not in the good way) about all those "scars" and the Terminator eyes... obviously Shepard was damaged worse than just dead. There seems to be missing a lot of him/her...  
This gets a bit ridiculous really. A bit of the Renegade look was cool for a while, but when it gets worse, it just looks silly, with the eyes and all...

[Archereon]

The philosophical question of whether Shepard is still Shepard is more important than the religious one, seeing as religion has been pretty much confirmed false in Mass Effect (**** yeah, take that X-ian bitc*es!)...

[Little Paw]

TheTrooper1138 wrote...

Little Paw wrote...

Very good points Trooper!!!
I do remember that Ash conversation, and to me Bioware should have developed that instead of making her a throw away conversation in ME2.
Now you have me thinking!
I just checked out an old saved game and yes, it's a bit of a tease to hear her say that and then neither game really dives into it. I am sure at the time I blew it off, being the atheist and all. LOL
Maybe she will show up in ME3 and it can be revisited and developed.
As for atheism, don't sweat it...having strong values does not require any specific prescribed system. Anyone can have values.
I am a really good guy; just ask my wife and kids!
Peace...

Why would you not be? 
I'm not religious either, I'm just not atheist but agnostic, though I find myself strongly interested in European Pagan Religions, and I'd say I have stronger values than most Christians. Values like honesty for example which seem to count for nothing in Christianity.
Well, usually my characters ask Ash something like "but you're not a fanatic, right?", so I never really delved into that dialogue as well, but again, you do get the option to give a "positive" reply and that would make Shepard a religious person and then Shepard would probably have some issues about the whole resurrection thing.

Also, with my current Renegade character I find myself a bit amused (and not in the good way) about all those "scars" and the Terminator eyes... obviously Shepard was damaged worse than just dead. There seems to be missing a lot of him/her...  
This gets a bit ridiculous really. A bit of the Renegade look was cool for a while, but when it gets worse, it just looks silly, with the eyes and all...

I think the renegade scars and look is almost as silly and laughable as the final boss in ME2. I mean, I actually LAUGHED when I saw it. I called my 13 year old son over to the screen to point and laugh at it too.
It was more silly, and goofy than scary and awe inspiring, which what what I can only assume they were going for.
And platforms of enemies? What is this, Tron?

[Little Paw]

Little Paw wrote...

TheTrooper1138 wrote...

Little Paw wrote...

Very good points Trooper!!!
I do remember that Ash conversation, and to me Bioware should have developed that instead of making her a throw away conversation in ME2.
Now you have me thinking!
I just checked out an old saved game and yes, it's a bit of a tease to hear her say that and then neither game really dives into it. I am sure at the time I blew it off, being the atheist and all. LOL
Maybe she will show up in ME3 and it can be revisited and developed.
As for atheism, don't sweat it...having strong values does not require any specific prescribed system. Anyone can have values.
I am a really good guy; just ask my wife and kids!
Peace...

Why would you not be? 
I'm not religious either, I'm just not atheist but agnostic, though I find myself strongly interested in European Pagan Religions, and I'd say I have stronger values than most Christians. Values like honesty for example which seem to count for nothing in Christianity.
Well, usually my characters ask Ash something like "but you're not a fanatic, right?", so I never really delved into that dialogue as well, but again, you do get the option to give a "positive" reply and that would make Shepard a religious person and then Shepard would probably have some issues about the whole resurrection thing.

Also, with my current Renegade character I find myself a bit amused (and not in the good way) about all those "scars" and the Terminator eyes... obviously Shepard was damaged worse than just dead. There seems to be missing a lot of him/her...  
This gets a bit ridiculous really. A bit of the Renegade look was cool for a while, but when it gets worse, it just looks silly, with the eyes and all...

I think the renegade scars and look is almost as silly and laughable as the final boss in ME2. I mean, I actually LAUGHED when I saw it. I called my 13 year old son over to the screen to point and laugh at it too.
It was more silly, and goofy than scary and awe inspiring, which was what I can only assume they were going for.
And platforms of enemies? What is this, Tron?
Oh, and there you go again misbehaving: " Values like honesty for example which seem to count for nothing in
Christianity" - that talk makes people mad. Saying "count for nothing for many people" and I can agree, but I try and avoid gross generalizations that insult entire cultures of people -

Modifié par Little Paw, 21 mars 2010 - 02:30 .